Sindeband v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sindeband v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.

240 A.D. 329, 269 N.Y.S. 732, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10644

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 23, 1934

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D. 329 (Sindeband v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sindeband v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp., 240 A.D. 329, 269 N.Y.S. 732, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10644 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff claims in this second amended complaint that misrepresentations made by the defendant induced him to transfer one hundred shares of stock of the Engineers Public Service for sixty shares of the defendant Stone & Webster, Inc. The complaint alleges that the transfer of stock took place on March 1, 1930. The alleged misrepresentations which are claimed to have induced the transfer are stated in the complaint to have [330]*330been made on April 23,1930. The transfer on March first obviously could not have been induced by representations made seven weeks thereafter. The complaint contains a further defect in that no damage is shown to have resulted from the exchange. In paragraph seventh it is alleged “ that the plaintiff, in reliance thereon, was induced to part with his property which was valueless as hereinafter alleged.” It certainly cannot be claimed that the plaintiff was damaged by surrendering something which was valueless in exchange for something which, according to the ninth paragraph of his complaint, was worth $840.

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to dismiss the complaint granted, with ten dollars costs.

Present — Finch, P. J., Martin, O’Malley, Townley and Glennon, JJ.

Order reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff claims in this second amended complaint that misrepresentations made by the defendant induced him to transfer one hundred shares of stock of the Engineers Public Service for sixty shares of the defendant Stone & Webster, Inc. The complaint alleges that the transfer of stock took place on March 1, 1930. The alleged misrepresentations which are claimed to have induced the transfer are stated in the complaint to have [330]*330been made on April 23,1930. The transfer on March first obviously could not have been induced by representations made seven weeks thereafter. The complaint contains a further defect in that no damage is shown to have resulted from the exchange. In paragraph seventh it is alleged “ that the plaintiff, in reliance thereon, was induced to part with his property which was valueless as hereinafter alleged.” It certainly cannot be claimed that the plaintiff was damaged by surrendering something which was valueless in exchange for something which, according to the ninth paragraph of his complaint, was worth $840.

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to dismiss the complaint granted, with ten dollars costs.

Present — Finch, P. J., Martin, O’Malley, Townley and Glennon, JJ.

Order reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 329, 269 N.Y.S. 732, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sindeband-v-stone-webster-engineering-corp-nyappdiv-1934.